Unconfigured Ad

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Lalla
    Junior Member
    • Apr 2015
    • 7

    FPKM interpretation

    Hi all!

    I am analyzing differential isoform expression between some samples. I run Cuffdiff2 and i found the differentially expressed isoforms. I also calculated the porportion of the expression of each isoform compared to the expression of the gene (the sum of the expressions of all the isoforms of that gene). Now I need to better filter my results. I was thinking to focus on the highly expressed isoforms and on those with a relevant proportion, but I couldn't find a criteria to choose a cutoff based on the FPKM. When can I say that a gene or isoform is highly expressed? And how can I understand when a proportion is relevant? I would think that the relevance of the proportion depends also on the total expression, i.e an isoform which account for the 30% of an highly expressed gene might be not as relevant as an isoform which account for the 30% of a low expressed gene, am i correct?
    I had a look to related posts in this forum and to several articles but i couldn't find a clear guidline. Maybe the answer is not simple but if you could suggest me some statistical approach to analyze these data would be great.
    Thanks in advance!
  • Lalla
    Junior Member
    • Apr 2015
    • 7

    #2
    FPKM interpretation

    Hi all!

    I am analyzing differential isoform expression between some samples. I run Cuffdiff2 and i found the differentially expressed isoforms. I also calculated the porportion of the expression of each isoform compared to the expression of the gene (the sum of the expressions of all the isoforms of that gene). Now I need to better filter my results. I was thinking to focus on the highly expressed isoforms and on those with a relevant proportion, but I couldn't find a criteria to choose a cutoff based on the FPKM. When can I say that a gene or isoform is highly expressed? And how can I understand when a proportion is relevant? I would think that the relevance of the proportion depends also on the total expression, i.e an isoform which account for the 30% of an highly expressed gene might be not as relevant as an isoform which account for the 30% of a low expressed gene, am i correct?
    I had a look to related posts in this forum and to several articles but i couldn't find a clear guidline. Maybe the answer is not simple but if you could suggest me some statistical approach to analyze these data would be great.
    Thanks in advance!

    Comment

    • bastianwur
      Member
      • Feb 2014
      • 98

      #3
      There's no good answer for this.
      Besides that I'd use the p/q value from the output, that's at least easy .

      Comment

      • Lalla
        Junior Member
        • Apr 2015
        • 7

        #4
        Thanks for your reply.
        Is not possible at all to do some sort of normalization per abundance in FPKM? If FPKM reflect the expression of transcripts in my sample I think there should be a way to find out the "significance" of a change in relative abundance of a transcript per total expression of a gene. Any suggestion is warmly welcomed!

        Comment

        Latest Articles

        Collapse

        • SEQadmin2
          Nine Things a Sample Prep Scientist Thinks About Before Sequencing
          by SEQadmin2


          I’m not a sequencing expert. I’m a purification scientist who uses NGS to evaluate workflows my group develops. With this perspective, we think about the sample first and the NGS workflow second. The sequencer is an exceptionally honest reporter, but it can only report on what you give it, so whether you get clean, interpretable data from an NGS workflow is largely determined before you begin.


          Here are nine questions we think about, in roughly the order they matter, before...
          06-18-2026, 07:11 AM
        • SEQadmin2
          From Collection to Sequencing: Why Sample Preparation and Preservation Define Sequencing Data
          by SEQadmin2


          Data variability is still an issue in sequencing technologies despite the advances in reproducibility and accuracy of these platforms. But the problem does not originate in the sequencing itself, but in the previous steps, before the sample reaches the sequencer.


          The first step is collection, followed by preservation and sample preparation for analysis. Most scientists overlook those steps, but not being careful might just be skewing the experiment’s results.
          ...
          06-02-2026, 10:05 AM

        ad_right_rmr

        Collapse

        News

        Collapse

        Topics Statistics Last Post
        Started by SEQadmin2, 06-17-2026, 06:09 AM
        0 responses
        32 views
        0 reactions
        Last Post SEQadmin2  
        Started by SEQadmin2, 06-09-2026, 11:58 AM
        0 responses
        97 views
        0 reactions
        Last Post SEQadmin2  
        Started by SEQadmin2, 06-05-2026, 10:09 AM
        0 responses
        117 views
        0 reactions
        Last Post SEQadmin2  
        Started by SEQadmin2, 06-04-2026, 08:59 AM
        0 responses
        109 views
        0 reactions
        Last Post SEQadmin2  
        Working...